Over the weekend, Joern Fischer wrote a criticism of transdisciplinary research. I was very eager to read it because it is something I have been wondering about over the last few months too. I began commenting on his blog, but, as my comment grew longer, I thought it is perhaps a better idea to flesh out my thoughts into a full post. Overall, I agree with Joern’s misgivings, but I would go even further to suggest that he was perhaps too forgiving towards transdisciplinary research.
I’ve just returned to South Africa, where I’ll spend the next few months adding the final touches to my PhD thesis. Of course, being back home means that I spend my free time playing with my camera trap. I thought I’d share two of my favourite videos from the last few nights.
The first is a very short clip of the small-spotted genet (Genetta genetta). I’m very pleased about spotting this beautiful carnivore because I regularly found the remains of laughing doves and helmeted guineafowl and always assumed that they were killed by feral cats. It’s always nice to spot natural predators.
The second clip is of a male Impala (Aepyceros melampus) scent-marking his territory.
Biodiversity conservation and poverty alleviation often walk hand-in-hand. At the global scale, most species and the majority of poor people are concentrated in a narrow band near the tropics. This is also true at smaller scales, where formal protected areas for conservation are regularly situated away from urban centres and, therefore, often coincide with poor communities deprived of basic infrastructure. As a consequence, any conservation strategy that hopes to be sustainable in the long-term should pay careful attention to local socio-economic conditions.
Regular readers of this blog might know that I have a soft spot for Golden Gate Highlands National Park (GGHNP) in South Africa (e.g. the history of the park and the guide to the hiking trails). This national park happens to be in one of South Africa’s poorest regions: the Maluti a Phufong local municipality.
Consider these scary statistics for the region:
- Only 1 in every 4 people (26.8%) has successfully complete secondary school education.
- Approximately 75 % (155 429 out of 208 296) of people aged between 15 and 64 are unemployed.
- 80% of households earn less than ZAR 40 000 per annum (that’s roughly US$10 per day shared among 3.35 people per household).
There is no doubt that the region surrounding GGHNP is in dire need of rejuvenation. I suppose it’s unsurprising then that the South African Journal of Science published a commentary in December last year criticising the recently approved 10 year management plan for GGHNP. In short, the authors argued that the management plan failed to highlight the need for conservation strategies that address the harsh socio-economic realities of the region and they suggested that tourism in the region be fast-tracked to generate revenue.
Here are some snippets from their essay:
“The GGHNP management plan can only succeed in promoting biodiversity and heritage conservation if it provides livelihood opportunities that safeguard continued socio-economic benefits.”
“Park resources, if managed properly, can provide long-term sustainable benefit to individuals, communities and institutions.”
“There must be speedy documentation of cultural heritage sites to promote route tourism development.“
“The GGHNP has rich cultural and heritage resources, yet is unable to effectively preserve them and to turn these assets into tourist attractions that earn revenue and provide opportunities for local economic development.”
At first inspection, this all sounds good. They use all the right buzzwords and seem to tick all the boxes. But I couldn’t help being annoyed when reading this commentary. Along with disagreeing with its general argument, I also had other misgivings, mostly due to the misrepresentation of the current situation at GGHNP. I pointed out these errors to the editor at South African Journal of Science and these views were published last week (open access). Continue reading
Two years ago, I treated myself with a Bushnell 8MP camera trap. I bought this bit of kit purely for my own amusement – without any scientific intentions – but even I can’t believe how much fun I’ve had using it during the last two summers spent at home in South Africa. Below is a little video showcasing some of the cool animals I’ve managed capture on film.
The are some things to consider: I only have one camera so I needed 6 weeks of trapping (over two summers) for this 2 minute compilation. Not that I am complaining; I loved crawling on my belly to set up the camera in a rocky cave. Furthermore, this was all filmed on our family farm – not a nature reserve – so I am sorry to disappoint if you were expecting the big five (Try the BBC, perhaps David Attenborough can provide that?). Lastly, please excuse my amateurish efforts because I know very little about video editing and even less about classical music.
How many species can you identify?
I’ve written about Golden Gate Highlands National Park in the past.
It’s a region that is very close to to my heart; I’ve spent hundreds of hours (and thousands of footsteps) on the sandstone slopes. Unfortunately, there are no complete guides to the hiking routes in the park – so I set out to make one of my own.
You can find route descriptions, hiking profiles, maps and photos of the main routes in the park by visiting this new page on my site. You can also download the route information as .kml shapefiles that can be imported into Google Earth or any other GIS platform.
Should we conserve nature at the expense of the economy? Specifically, should we risk the collapse of major industrial sectors to save species?
We’ve created modern buzzwords like “sustainable development” and “new conservation” to explain multiple-objective conservation programs because many argue that conservation is only sustainable when it aligns with other economic, social and political goals. I’ve even argued this point-of-view in the past. Society is petrified of putting an end to the exploitation of nature because we worry about the terrible consequences of dismantling the modern-day economy. Should we worry about the impending threat of unemployment, debt and unpaid mortgages if we were to choose conservation instead of consumption?
The short answer: No! Well, at least not if the past is any predictor of the future. Continue reading